Compositional
Questions and Approaches

Answer #1: No. The technology used should be integral to the work.
It needs to be integrated into the thematic fabric of the performance
or installation. This make the use of technology purposeful, meaningful
as opposed to a gimmick to dazzle. (Apryl Seech)

Answer #2:If you can do something
performative with technology that is informative or reflective of the
way we live today or directions in which we are evolving culturally or
creatively, yes...by all means. We owe it to ourselves to keep creating
exciting new work and realizing that along the way that each effort may
not be a great production, performance, art or stellar piece of technology...but
the sum of our efforts moving towards a synthesis of art and media is
truly something worthwhile in ways we are only able to sense, but perhaps
not fully comprehend. Personally, I find some works involving technology
and cyborg-bodies ethically challenging and dislike body-invasive art
or abandonment of the observable reality for the theoretical. The virtual
and visceral are in dialogue to some extent in any piece which contains
both human creativity or hand in creation and technology.(Nadja Masura)

Answer #3: No. The technology used should be integral
to the work. It needs to be integrated into the thematic fabric of the
performance or installation. This make the use of technology purposeful,
meaningful as opposed to a gimmick to dazzle.(Apryl Seech)

Question #2: Just because you did; do we have to
see it?

Answer #1: I take this question as does the audience
have know the technology is being use. Personally I am torn on this particular
issue. If the technology is integrated into the fabric of a performance
or installation then it would seem that exposing would only highlight
the technology over the actual piece. A piece I created last year used
motion sensing technology. I choose to not say anything about the technology.
In my opinion, trigger audio score augmented the atmosphere of the overall
piece. To me to bring the technology to the audience’s attention
would have accentuated the importance of the technology over the meaning
of the piece. However, after the performance, I learned that the audience
really wanted to know. Audience members felt that it would have assisted
them in understanding the work.
I believe there are other reasons for exposing the technology. New media
can be very transparent, almost invisible. That discovering ways to reveal
it to the audience is in a sense a political act, awakening the viewers’
awareness of media’s transparency. Yes there can be a purpose to
exposing or letting the audience “see it.” (Apryl Seech)

Answer #2: But of course the audience is
not forced to attend. Often it seems as if the artist/technologist must
cope with fluctuating levels of interest (and perhaps understanding) from
an audience which either expects or desires a traditional piece rather
than a hybrid, or is hooked on flash and hype....which can lead to works
which emphasize technology as medium and message rather than works which
parallel creative thought and media content. The former often creates
an aesthetic which can become predictably disjuncture, dark and futuristic.
However, when these creative thought and technology are married, we can
transcend expectations for human creativity. (Nadja Masura)

Question #18: Write about a few of the compositional
strategies you are using either as a choreographer or as a media/technical
artist. Are there differences between analog and digital strategies?

Answer #1: I think in most art mediums there
are universal principals of design that, once converted to fit the appropriate
medium, are interchangeable. I think the most common element across the
board is based on qualitative means and scaling. Are the motions big or
small, delicate or stern, is the media quiet or striking, up close or
not. These are parallel questions I feel that are most important when
questioning composition strategies in such D&T endeavors.(Ricky Alvarez)

Question #21: Where do you see the issues of content
and form evolving within the context of the workshop – specifically
ideas of media as mirror/constructing self, the concept of the cyborg,
issues of remote presence, and the use of navigable structures/invisible
space?

Answer #1: I think in any learning process that there
are always high or ambitious expectations in achieving a successful end
product when entering a new medium. Yet, before one can fun a 5k marathon
one must first learn how to walk. With that said, within the context of
the workshop I felt that steadily we began to work towards a more cohesive
end product once we gained more knowledge and experience with the media,
movement, and workspace. Breaking through any preliminary anxiety or skepticism
I felt our efforts began to evolve in a more mature and complex direction,
which I feel once again is natural in any learning process. Considering
how diverse of a group we were, especially in our backgrounds and computer
literacy, I felt the mix contributed to some sound discussions and firm
grounding within the classroom.
Specifically though, focusing on provocative questions on such things are
media as mirror, constructing self, the concept of cyborg's, issues of remote
presence, and the use of navigable structures and invisible space (all topics
presented in the workshop) I fell provided an excellent spring board to
launch into theoretical discussions and investigative probing. Although
the majority of our time was focused on learning, the moments we were given
(daily opportunities) to execute creative attempts and investigate these
topics were first challenging since the information was so new, but beneficial
without a doubt. These attempts exercised our abilities to implement our
introductory knowledge in Max/MSP or in 3D modeling, developed an awareness
of staging technological devices, informed us of technical limitations and
opportunities, and overall exercised our creative minds in the whole directing
and implementation of a full production in dance in technology which is
not always easily achieved in our home facilities. Though as mentioned before,
with 10 days concentrated in learning the creative exercise we pursued,
I thought, served as rough sketches of would could later develop into a
more solid conceptual idea. (Ricky Alvarez)